Karnataka Court November 1977 Judgments
Shivaramaiah Vs. Mallikarjunaiah and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-08-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Kant76
V.S. Malimath, J. 1. This application is by the original first plaintiff made under Section 151 of the Civil P. C. praying for a direction that he be put in possession of 1/4th share in the suit schedule properties after partition by metes and bounds.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that the applicant in I. A. No. I Mallikarjunaiah and his sister Sarojamma instituted original suit No. 7 of 1965 for partition and possession of the suit schedule properties. The court of first instance made a decree declaring that the first plaintiff is entitled to 2/9th share and the second plaintiff is entitled to l/9th share in the suit schedule properties. The said decree was challenged by Shivaramiah, defendant 2 in R. F. A. No. 52 of 1970 in this Court. This Court partly allowed the appeal and modified the decree made by the court of first instance. This Court declared that the two plaintiffs together are entitled to 1/4th share; that defendant 1 is entitled to l/4th share; and that defendant...
Tag this Judgment!N. Venkataramanappa Vs. D.K. Naikar and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-07-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Kant57; 1978CriLJ726
Malimath, J. 1. The complainant in this case is an Advocate practising at Bangalore who has filed this petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) praying that the two accused he punished under Section 12 of the Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts stated by the complainant are as follows; Cr. R. P. No. 605 of 1973 was filed by one Nagawwa against V. S. Koujalgi and A. K. Kottarashetti and the same was pending on the file of this Court. It was disposed of by Mr. Justice D. Noronha on 16-12-1974. On 11-4-1977 the Chief Justice of this Court made a speech referring to the sad demise of the retired Judge Mr. Noronha, Appreciating the qualifies and judicial independence of Justice Noronha, the Chief Justice observed us follows:'I will be failing in my duty if I do not place on record an incident which may never be known to the public. There was a criminal case pending in this Court in which some of the Ministers of the...
Tag this Judgment!M.R. Nanjunda Setty Vs. Land Tribunal, Somwarpet Taluk and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-07-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Kant86; ILR1978KAR16
Govinda Bhat, C.J. 1. This writ appeal preferred by a land-holder is directed against the order dated 8-12-1975 made by Venkataramiah, .T., in W. P. 5739 of 1975 rejecting the writ petition at the preliminary hearing stage.2. The appellant us the holder of three agricultural lands comprised in Survey 'Nos. 10/1, 11/2 and 89/1 of Bychanahalli village, Kushalangar Ta-fuk, Coorg District. The second respondent made an application before the Land Tribunal. Soniwarpet Taluk, Coorg District, under Section 48-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, for grant of occupancy right in respect of the aforesaid three lands alleging that he is a tenant of the lands personally cultivating the same immediately prior to 1-3-1974. On the said application, notice was issued to the -appellant land-holder. It is relevant to observe that before notice was issued to the appellant, the application of the second respondent in form No. 7 was not verified by the Tahsildar with reference to the entries in the R...
Tag this Judgment!Kallanagouda Somanagouda Patil Vs. Rudragouda and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-04-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Kant61; 1978(1)KarLJ34
Malimath, J. 1. This Writ Petition has come to us on a reference made by Jagannatha Shetty J., on the ground that this Writ Petition raises an important question of law for determination.2. The First respondent sold Survey No. 76/3B of Rayanal village, Hubli Tuluk, in the district oE Dharwar to the petitioner on the 13th of June 1969. The Karnataka Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1966, came into force on the 1st of May 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Karnataka Act'). By Section 47 of the Karnataka Act, the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Act') was repealed, expressly providing that Section 6 of the Karnataka General Clauses Act, 1899, shall be applicable in respect of such repeal and Section 24 of the said Act shall not be applicable. The first respondent made an application to the Special Deputy Commissioner, Dharwar, under Sec, 5 (J) of the Karnataka Act for a decl...
Tag this Judgment!Mysore Manufacturers and Traders Vs. Ray Choudhary
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Nov-03-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ577
ORDERC. Honniah, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 10-8-1976 by which the Metropolitan Magistrate, III Court, Bangalore City, directed the return of the complaint to the complainant for being presented to the proper Court.2. The complainant Dr. Indra Sanghi, who is doing business in Bangalore under the name and style M/s. 'Mysore Manufacturers and Traders', imported five paper bags of synthetic resin under actual user's licence from Germany. The goods arrived at Madras Harbour. The accused who is a clearing agent, agreed to clear the goods and despatch the same to Bangalore by M/s. Umashankar Transport as desired by the complainant. For doing this work, a demand draft for Rs. 3200/- was sent to the accused and the same was accepted by him. The accused, after clearing the goods, did not send the same to Bangalore, as alleged by the complainant.3. A complaint was filed against the accused that he had committed criminal breach of trust, on the basis of which ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›